Ministry of Justice

We do not collate information on how many cases are referred to the Chief Executive of HMPPS under the Early Removal Scheme or the outcome of such referrals.

Guidance to Prison Governors, and all those involved in administering the scheme including the Chief Executive, is contained in the Prison Service Instruction: The Early Removal Scheme and Release of Foreign National Prisoners (PSI 04/2013) which was last updated on 23 September 2025 and is available at the following link: Early removal scheme and release of foreign national prisoners.

This gives information on the circumstances where removal might undermine the Scheme or public confidence in the criminal justice system.

We do not collate information on how many cases are referred to the Chief Executive of HMPPS under the Early Removal Scheme or the outcome of such referrals.

Guidance to Prison Governors, and all those involved in administering the scheme including the Chief Executive, is contained in the Prison Service Instruction: The Early Removal Scheme and Release of Foreign National Prisoners (PSI 04/2013) which was last updated on 23 September 2025 and is available at the following link: Early removal scheme and release of foreign national prisoners.

This gives information on the circumstances where removal might undermine the Scheme or public confidence in the criminal justice system.

We do not collate information on how many cases are referred to the Chief Executive of HMPPS under the Early Removal Scheme or the outcome of such referrals.

Guidance to Prison Governors, and all those involved in administering the scheme including the Chief Executive, is contained in the Prison Service Instruction: The Early Removal Scheme and Release of Foreign National Prisoners (PSI 04/2013) which was last updated on 23 September 2025 and is available at the following link: Early removal scheme and release of foreign national prisoners.

This gives information on the circumstances where removal might undermine the Scheme or public confidence in the criminal justice system.

As of 30 June 2025, there were 989 Foreign National Offenders (FNOs) in prison in England and Wales serving a sentence for a principal offence involving ‘causing death’.

All FNOs who receive a prison sentence in the UK are referred for deportation at the earliest opportunity including via the Early Removal Scheme for eligible determinate sentenced prisoners, Tariff Expired Removal Scheme for those serving indeterminate sentences, or via Prisoner Transfer Agreement where one is in place and the offender meets the relevant requirements. In all cases they will be barred from ever returning to the UK.

Deportations of FNOs, including murderers and rapists, are up 32%, with more than 8,700 deported since this Government came into power.

Returns of FNOs in the year-ending December 2025 are higher than any levels of returns observed since 2018.

We have recently launched a new innovation challenge with His Majesty’s Government Communications Centre (HMGCC) Co-Creation aimed at combatting the growing threat of drones around prisons.

The Counter-Drone Challenge competition closed on 4 December 2025. Selected industry partners will receive up to £60,000 funding to develop proof-of-concept systems over a 12-week period.

The number of full-time equivalent band 3-5 prison officers in each public sector prison is published quarterly as part of the “HM Prison and Probation Service workforce statistics” publication. The latest data, for staff in post on 31st December 2025, is available in Table 15 of this spreadsheet: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/699d794d07d7bff3604d6be2/hmpps-workforce-statistics-tables-dec-2025_final_file.ods.

The number of prisoners in each prison is published as part of the “Offender management statistics quarterly” publication. The latest data, also for 31st December 2025, is available in Table 1_Q_13: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6978d8c475d4437096552064/prison-population-31-Dec-2025.ods.

The list of each prison, their function and whether they are male only is available at this link: Prisons in England and Wales - GOV.UK.

These publicly available resources can be used to calculate the average prison officer to prisoner ratio for male prisons.

The Government is considering the full range of options to strengthen and improve standards to safeguard the security and dignity of the deceased, particularly in the context of a full response to the Fuller Inquiry Phase 2 report which will be provided by summer 2026.

Our consideration has included discussions about a potential role for a relevant partner organisation such as the Human Tissue Authority.

The Ministry of Justice provides all Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) in England and Wales with core grant funding for victims of all crime types, which can be used to commission restorative justice and domestic abuse services. In addition, they receive ring-fenced funding for domestic and sexual abuse services. PCCs are best placed to assess local need and commission services based on the needs of the population in the local area. Restorative justice services should be targeted to the most appropriate cases, where we have clear evidence for the benefits of that approach and should only take place when both the victim and the offender agree, and it is considered safe.

The Ministry of Justice is investing £550 million in victim support services over the next three years – the biggest investment in victim support services to date. We will be increasing funding for victim support services year on year, from 2026 to 2029, recognising the need to meet the rising cost pressures of delivery. I have protected dedicated VAWG victims spending in the department by maintaining 2024-25 funding levels for ringfenced sexual violence and domestic abuse support this year.

Last November, the Government announced the abolition of PCCs, the first in a series of reforms that were set out in the recent Police Reform White Paper. In light of this announcement, we are exploring changes to the delivery of victims funding to ensure this is delivered in the best way in the future. We recognise the important work PCCs and Mayors do to commission vital support services for victims and witnesses, including restorative justice and domestic abuse services. Ensuring ongoing support to victims is a key priority for this Government.

The Ministry of Justice provides all Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) in England and Wales with core grant funding for victims of all crime types, which can be used to commission restorative justice and domestic abuse services. In addition, they receive ring-fenced funding for domestic and sexual abuse services. PCCs are best placed to assess local need and commission services based on the needs of the population in the local area. Restorative justice services should be targeted to the most appropriate cases, where we have clear evidence for the benefits of that approach and should only take place when both the victim and the offender agree, and it is considered safe.

The Ministry of Justice is investing £550 million in victim support services over the next three years – the biggest investment in victim support services to date. We will be increasing funding for victim support services year on year, from 2026 to 2029, recognising the need to meet the rising cost pressures of delivery. I have protected dedicated VAWG victims spending in the department by maintaining 2024-25 funding levels for ringfenced sexual violence and domestic abuse support this year.

Last November, the Government announced the abolition of PCCs, the first in a series of reforms that were set out in the recent Police Reform White Paper. In light of this announcement, we are exploring changes to the delivery of victims funding to ensure this is delivered in the best way in the future. We recognise the important work PCCs and Mayors do to commission vital support services for victims and witnesses, including restorative justice and domestic abuse services. Ensuring ongoing support to victims is a key priority for this Government.

The data requested is provided in the attached excel table. The table includes data covering the period 2020 – 2024 on the number of offenders who were convicted of common assault and battery offences who did not receive an immediate custodial sentence; separated by the number of previous occasions the offender had been convicted for a violence against the person offence where that offence was common assault and battery.

Previous convictions are already a statutory aggravating factor, with Sentencing Guidelines being clear that sentencers must consider the nature and relevance of previous convictions, and the time elapsed since the previous convictions.

Between 5 July 2024 and 29 April 2025, the Ministry of Justice recorded lost or stolen:

179 laptops

475 mobile phones

11 other electronic devices

All Ministry of Justice laptops and mobile phones are encrypted and protected to National Cyber Security Centre standards. The Department has mandatory reporting procedures for lost or stolen items, and incidents are investigated in line with security policy.

Treatment and clinical prescribing decisions are the responsibility of services commissioned by NHS in prisons and local authority service providers in the community.

Responsibility for continuity of care for prison leavers, including access to medications and clinical care rests with prison drug and alcohol treatment providers liaising with community treatment providers.

The promotion of one medicine over another is strictly regulated in England and Wales.

The data requested are provided in the attached excel tables. The tables include data covering the period 2020 – 2024 on:

- The number of offenders who were convicted of a child sex offence who did not receive an immediate custodial sentence by number of previous occasions where the offender was convicted of a child sex offence.

- The number of offenders who were convicted of an indictable offence but did not receive an immediate custodial sentence, by the number of previous convictions (between 7-10 previous convictions).

- The number of offenders who were convicted of a theft offence who did not receive immediate custody, by number of previous convictions (between 3-10 previous convictions).

- The number of offenders convicted of theft from a shop who did not receive an immediate custodial sentence by number of previous convictions for the same offence.

As set out in previous responses, this data is not regularly published or held in an easily accessible format. The information supplied has been sourced from a bespoke retrieval from the Police National Computer database.

Previous convictions are already a statutory aggravating factor, with Sentencing Guidelines being clear that sentencers must consider the nature and relevance of previous convictions, and the time elapsed since the previous convictions.

The data requested are provided in the attached excel tables. The tables include data covering the period 2020 – 2024 on:

- The number of offenders who were convicted of a child sex offence who did not receive an immediate custodial sentence by number of previous occasions where the offender was convicted of a child sex offence.

- The number of offenders who were convicted of an indictable offence but did not receive an immediate custodial sentence, by the number of previous convictions (between 7-10 previous convictions).

- The number of offenders who were convicted of a theft offence who did not receive immediate custody, by number of previous convictions (between 3-10 previous convictions).

- The number of offenders convicted of theft from a shop who did not receive an immediate custodial sentence by number of previous convictions for the same offence.

As set out in previous responses, this data is not regularly published or held in an easily accessible format. The information supplied has been sourced from a bespoke retrieval from the Police National Computer database.

Previous convictions are already a statutory aggravating factor, with Sentencing Guidelines being clear that sentencers must consider the nature and relevance of previous convictions, and the time elapsed since the previous convictions.

The data requested are provided in the attached excel tables. The tables include data covering the period 2020 – 2024 on:

- The number of offenders who were convicted of a child sex offence who did not receive an immediate custodial sentence by number of previous occasions where the offender was convicted of a child sex offence.

- The number of offenders who were convicted of an indictable offence but did not receive an immediate custodial sentence, by the number of previous convictions (between 7-10 previous convictions).

- The number of offenders who were convicted of a theft offence who did not receive immediate custody, by number of previous convictions (between 3-10 previous convictions).

- The number of offenders convicted of theft from a shop who did not receive an immediate custodial sentence by number of previous convictions for the same offence.

As set out in previous responses, this data is not regularly published or held in an easily accessible format. The information supplied has been sourced from a bespoke retrieval from the Police National Computer database.

Previous convictions are already a statutory aggravating factor, with Sentencing Guidelines being clear that sentencers must consider the nature and relevance of previous convictions, and the time elapsed since the previous convictions.

The data requested are provided in the attached excel tables. The tables include data covering the period 2020 – 2024 on:

- The number of offenders who were convicted of a child sex offence who did not receive an immediate custodial sentence by number of previous occasions where the offender was convicted of a child sex offence.

- The number of offenders who were convicted of an indictable offence but did not receive an immediate custodial sentence, by the number of previous convictions (between 7-10 previous convictions).

- The number of offenders who were convicted of a theft offence who did not receive immediate custody, by number of previous convictions (between 3-10 previous convictions).

- The number of offenders convicted of theft from a shop who did not receive an immediate custodial sentence by number of previous convictions for the same offence.

As set out in previous responses, this data is not regularly published or held in an easily accessible format. The information supplied has been sourced from a bespoke retrieval from the Police National Computer database.

Previous convictions are already a statutory aggravating factor, with Sentencing Guidelines being clear that sentencers must consider the nature and relevance of previous convictions, and the time elapsed since the previous convictions.

The Government is in the process of establishing a Preventative Analytics for Youth Justice Advisory Panel. As the Panel has not yet been established, no recommendations have been made on specific data sources or the sharing of data with youth justice partners for the purposes of support and safeguarding.

At this early stage, we are not able to state the specific datasets which will be accessed. Exploratory work is required to identify what data would be useful for the purposes of prevention, where it is held, and how to use it responsibly, ethically, and legally. However, it is anticipated that the programme will draw on data already held by government departments, local youth justice services, and local authorities. This may include information about a child’s contact with the youth justice system, education, health services, social care, or other relevant services.

Where data is shared between public authorities, we expect this will take place under established legal gateways for example the Digital Economy Act or the UK General Data Protection Regulation. Where additional permissions are required (e.g. due to the terms of a privacy notice), then such permissions will be sought. The Department will ensure appropriate governance arrangements are made and documented (e.g. through Data Protection Impact Assessments and Data Sharing Agreements).

At this stage, we are not able to describe how the data will be used in the sense of defining specific processing techniques. The purpose of the advisory panel is to guide the development of these techniques in an effective, ethical, and legal manner. That said, the programme will not make automated decisions about individual children or replace professional judgement; rather it will provide evidence-based insights to help practitioners identify where interventions may be most effective. Strong safeguards will be sought to ensure fairness, transparency and protection against bias.

The Government intends to establish the Advisory Panel on preventative analytics for youth justice by spring. Work is already underway and further details will be set out in due course.

The Government is in the process of establishing a Preventative Analytics for Youth Justice Advisory Panel. As the Panel has not yet been established, no recommendations have been made on specific data sources or the sharing of data with youth justice partners for the purposes of support and safeguarding.

At this early stage, we are not able to state the specific datasets which will be accessed. Exploratory work is required to identify what data would be useful for the purposes of prevention, where it is held, and how to use it responsibly, ethically, and legally. However, it is anticipated that the programme will draw on data already held by government departments, local youth justice services, and local authorities. This may include information about a child’s contact with the youth justice system, education, health services, social care, or other relevant services.

Where data is shared between public authorities, we expect this will take place under established legal gateways for example the Digital Economy Act or the UK General Data Protection Regulation. Where additional permissions are required (e.g. due to the terms of a privacy notice), then such permissions will be sought. The Department will ensure appropriate governance arrangements are made and documented (e.g. through Data Protection Impact Assessments and Data Sharing Agreements).

At this stage, we are not able to describe how the data will be used in the sense of defining specific processing techniques. The purpose of the advisory panel is to guide the development of these techniques in an effective, ethical, and legal manner. That said, the programme will not make automated decisions about individual children or replace professional judgement; rather it will provide evidence-based insights to help practitioners identify where interventions may be most effective. Strong safeguards will be sought to ensure fairness, transparency and protection against bias.

The Government intends to establish the Advisory Panel on preventative analytics for youth justice by spring. Work is already underway and further details will be set out in due course.

The Government is in the process of establishing a Preventative Analytics for Youth Justice Advisory Panel. As the Panel has not yet been established, no recommendations have been made on specific data sources or the sharing of data with youth justice partners for the purposes of support and safeguarding.

At this early stage, we are not able to state the specific datasets which will be accessed. Exploratory work is required to identify what data would be useful for the purposes of prevention, where it is held, and how to use it responsibly, ethically, and legally. However, it is anticipated that the programme will draw on data already held by government departments, local youth justice services, and local authorities. This may include information about a child’s contact with the youth justice system, education, health services, social care, or other relevant services.

Where data is shared between public authorities, we expect this will take place under established legal gateways for example the Digital Economy Act or the UK General Data Protection Regulation. Where additional permissions are required (e.g. due to the terms of a privacy notice), then such permissions will be sought. The Department will ensure appropriate governance arrangements are made and documented (e.g. through Data Protection Impact Assessments and Data Sharing Agreements).

At this stage, we are not able to describe how the data will be used in the sense of defining specific processing techniques. The purpose of the advisory panel is to guide the development of these techniques in an effective, ethical, and legal manner. That said, the programme will not make automated decisions about individual children or replace professional judgement; rather it will provide evidence-based insights to help practitioners identify where interventions may be most effective. Strong safeguards will be sought to ensure fairness, transparency and protection against bias.

The Government intends to establish the Advisory Panel on preventative analytics for youth justice by spring. Work is already underway and further details will be set out in due course.

The Government is in the process of establishing a Preventative Analytics for Youth Justice Advisory Panel. As the Panel has not yet been established, no recommendations have been made on specific data sources or the sharing of data with youth justice partners for the purposes of support and safeguarding.

At this early stage, we are not able to state the specific datasets which will be accessed. Exploratory work is required to identify what data would be useful for the purposes of prevention, where it is held, and how to use it responsibly, ethically, and legally. However, it is anticipated that the programme will draw on data already held by government departments, local youth justice services, and local authorities. This may include information about a child’s contact with the youth justice system, education, health services, social care, or other relevant services.

Where data is shared between public authorities, we expect this will take place under established legal gateways for example the Digital Economy Act or the UK General Data Protection Regulation. Where additional permissions are required (e.g. due to the terms of a privacy notice), then such permissions will be sought. The Department will ensure appropriate governance arrangements are made and documented (e.g. through Data Protection Impact Assessments and Data Sharing Agreements).

At this stage, we are not able to describe how the data will be used in the sense of defining specific processing techniques. The purpose of the advisory panel is to guide the development of these techniques in an effective, ethical, and legal manner. That said, the programme will not make automated decisions about individual children or replace professional judgement; rather it will provide evidence-based insights to help practitioners identify where interventions may be most effective. Strong safeguards will be sought to ensure fairness, transparency and protection against bias.

The Government intends to establish the Advisory Panel on preventative analytics for youth justice by spring. Work is already underway and further details will be set out in due course.

The Government is in the process of establishing a Preventative Analytics for Youth Justice Advisory Panel. As the Panel has not yet been established, no recommendations have been made on specific data sources or the sharing of data with youth justice partners for the purposes of support and safeguarding.

At this early stage, we are not able to state the specific datasets which will be accessed. Exploratory work is required to identify what data would be useful for the purposes of prevention, where it is held, and how to use it responsibly, ethically, and legally. However, it is anticipated that the programme will draw on data already held by government departments, local youth justice services, and local authorities. This may include information about a child’s contact with the youth justice system, education, health services, social care, or other relevant services.

Where data is shared between public authorities, we expect this will take place under established legal gateways for example the Digital Economy Act or the UK General Data Protection Regulation. Where additional permissions are required (e.g. due to the terms of a privacy notice), then such permissions will be sought. The Department will ensure appropriate governance arrangements are made and documented (e.g. through Data Protection Impact Assessments and Data Sharing Agreements).

At this stage, we are not able to describe how the data will be used in the sense of defining specific processing techniques. The purpose of the advisory panel is to guide the development of these techniques in an effective, ethical, and legal manner. That said, the programme will not make automated decisions about individual children or replace professional judgement; rather it will provide evidence-based insights to help practitioners identify where interventions may be most effective. Strong safeguards will be sought to ensure fairness, transparency and protection against bias.

The Government intends to establish the Advisory Panel on preventative analytics for youth justice by spring. Work is already underway and further details will be set out in due course.

We have reviewed the recommendations of the Sullivan Review and examined how sex and gender data are currently collected across the main Ministry of Justice data systems. Currently, there is variation in terminology and approaches across these different systems.

We are therefore taking forward work to improve consistency in data collection. In doing so, we will align our approach to the Office for National Statistics’ ongoing harmonisation work on sex and gender data to ensure that our data collection is robust, comparable and consistent.

The Ministry of Justice does not offer remote or hybrid working contracts at the point of recruitment, with all employees having one of the Department’s offices or properties as a contractual base location.

Hybrid working is an informal, non-contractual arrangement that does not involve changes to pay, terms and conditions, or one’s contractual workplace.

Remote working may be agreed through a flexible working request, or as a reasonable adjustment. In some exceptional circumstances, employees have transferred into the Ministry of Justice on protected terms that include homeworking. Records of this, as well as flexible working and workplace adjustments records, are held locally and are not centrally accessible. This information could only be obtained at a disproportionate cost.

Over the next three financial years, the Ministry of Justice will allocate £281 million for youth justice grants and a further £46 million of funding for the extension of the Turnaround grant programme.

This is a continuation of funding levels from previous years but the Department has provided multi-year funding to youth justice services. This will give youth justice services the stability to retain staff, plan effectively with partners, and commission services more efficiently - ultimately strengthening their ability to tackle knife possession and other offences committed by children.

Funding will be allocated to Youth Justice Services across England and Wales using same distribution method that has been applied for the past 13 years. We recognise that the current method for allocating youth justice funding needs updating and later this year we will undertake a consultation about long-term funding and oversight arrangements for youth justice services.

The Ministry of Justice does not hold or collate the information requested centrally.

The Probation Service closely supervises serious offenders released from custody to protect the public and manage risk. The Government is investing in expanded monitoring and introducing new restrictive licence conditions to further strengthen probation’s ability to monitor and manage serious offenders in the community.

Electronic Monitoring (EM) is available for the Parole Board and probation to apply to individuals serving Extended Determinate Sentences or life sentences on release. In addition, we are significantly expanding the post‑custody use of EM. Recent policy changes, including the presumption to apply EM to Short Determinate Sentence leavers, mean thousands more offenders will be tagged in the community over the coming years as part of the Government’s plan to strengthen supervision, manage risk, and keep the public safe.

Whilst tagging is an important tool for probation, it is only one element of a wider range of measures used to monitor and manage individuals in the community. These include risk assessments, curfews, mandatory appointments, behavioural requirements, and where necessary, enforcement action.

Probation supervision is tailored to an offender’s risk and offence type, with licence conditions used to manage their risk in the community. Under our reforms, the highest risk offenders will continue to be supervised by Probation until the end of their sentence, to manage risk of harm and protect the public. They will face the toughest supervision – including GPS tracking, curfews, and exclusion zones.

Those convicted of sexual offending and subject to the notification requirements, serious violent offenders where the custodial term is 12 months or more, and those convicted of terrorism offences, fall to be managed under the statutory Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA). Under MAPPA, the Police, Probation and Prison Services must work together, with input from other agencies as necessary, to assess and manage the risks posed by such offenders. The Probation Service will supervise such offenders until they have completed their sentence, including for any period of licensed supervision in the community, in order to protect the public.

A package of measures has been announced to continue rebuilding the Probation Service, reflecting the Government’s commitment to strengthening probation services and improving public protection. By the final year of the spending review period, funding for probation and community services will increase by up to £700 million, an increase of around 45%.

Recruitment and training of staff remain high priorities, to ensure we have a sufficient workforce to safely supervise and manage people in the community. And we are recruiting more probation officers. The Probation Service exceeded our 2024-25 trainee target of 1,000, successfully onboarding 1,057 trainees and we have committed to onboarding a further 1,300 trainees in 2025/26.

Through the Our Future Probation Service (OFPS) Programme we will address the imbalance between capacity and workload, by reducing probation workloads by 25% by April 2027. We will achieve this by streamlining processes, reducing administrative tasks, and ensuring staff time is focused where it can have the greatest impact.

We are developing better digital tools to reduce the administrative burden at multiple stages of the probation journey, allowing probation practitioners to focus on public protection and rehabilitation. For example, we have developed Justice Transcribe, an AI-powered tool that takes meeting audio and turns into an accurate summary. This is done in minutes, and it cuts the time spent on writing up notes by more than 70%. Practitioners have reported reduced stress, increased confidence and more time to focus on people on probation, public safety and decision-making rather than administration.

Probation will prioritise supervision in the critical period after release – when offenders are most likely to reoffend – and focus resources on those who pose the highest risk. The Sentencing Act 2026 introduces several measures to streamline processes and enable probation to focus their efforts where they matter most to protect the public. The Government is also investing in expanded monitoring and introducing new restrictive licence conditions to further strengthen probation’s ability to monitor and manage serious offenders in the community.

Commissioned Rehabilitative Services (CRS) are specialist interventions delivered in partnership with private, voluntary and community organisations to support individuals under probation supervision, or on license following release from custody. They address key rehabilitative needs that, if unmet, increase the risk of reoffending and are designed to complement and improve access to mainstream services such as housing, healthcare, and local authority support. New contracts will go live in summer 2027 (Men) and Autumn 2028 (Women) which will further enhance the service offering including person-centred, strengths-based services with enhanced community links to connect offenders to new opportunities and social networks; enhanced custodial delivery; and greater focus on outcomes including distance-travelled.

Reducing violent reoffending is a central priority for this Government. We are strengthening the Probation Service, enhancing supervision of high-risk offenders, and delivering evidence-based interventions to address the drivers of violent crime.

We are investing in probation to ensure robust supervision and effective risk management of offenders in the community, including expanding electronic monitoring, and strengthening frontline capability. Supervision is tailored to risk and offence type, with licence conditions used to manage behaviour and protect the public. Under our reforms, high-risk offenders will continue to be supervised until the end of their sentence. They will face the toughest measures, including GPS tagging, curfews, exclusion zones, and new restriction zones where appropriate. We also make full use of recall powers where risk escalates, or licence conditions are breached.

Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) are central to managing serious violent and sexual offenders. Under MAPPA, probation, police and prisons work together to assess and manage risk through coordinated plans which can include enhanced supervision, regular multi-agency reviews, information sharing, and targeted risk management measures. High-risk offenders are subject to closer monitoring and oversight to ensure swift action where risk escalates.

Alongside enforcement, HMPPS delivers accredited offending behaviour programmes and wider rehabilitative support, including access to education, employment, accommodation, and substance misuse treatment. Building Choices, based on the latest international evidence on “What Works” to reduce reoffending, is an accredited cognitive-behavioural intervention designed to address attitudes, thinking patterns and behaviours linked to violent and other serious offending. It completed national rollout at the end of 2025 and is now available across England and Wales.

In the financial year 2022/2023, the Ministry of Justice invested £5 million in sports-related projects across England and Wales, to use sport to enhance positive outcomes for vulnerable young people at-risk of criminality (the ‘Youth Justice Sport Fund’). Around 50% of the 220 organisations funded through this programme provided boxing support to young people.

Youth justice funding now takes a more flexible approach. Local authorities receive funding to deliver youth justice services, including through the Turnaround early intervention programme. Local authorities can use this funding to commission activities that were previously supported by Youth Justice Sports Fund such as boxing.

An independent evaluation of the Turnaround programme published earlier this month highlighted that boys taking part in boxing reported improved physical and mental health.

As set out in the December 2024 10-Year Prison Capacity Strategy, this Government is committed to delivering an additional 14,000 prison places and aims to do so by 2031. Our build programme consists of the construction of four new prisons, including HMP Millsike delivered in March 2025, as well as the expansion and refurbishment of the existing estate. We broke ground at the site of the new prison HMP Welland Oaks in Leicestershire in November 2025.

This Government has invested £4.7 billion over the spending review period (2026/27 to 2028/29) to enable the delivery of these additional prison places at pace, and we have already delivered c.3,100 since taking office. We are also committed to undertaking critical maintenance work and the ambition to acquire more land for future prisons, should they be required.

The Ministry of Justice treats any disruption to the heating and hot water supply to any prison as a priority and implements contingency measures to rectify incidents that occur as soon as practically possible.

Safety and decency remained the primary focus throughout the recent disruption of the heating system at HMP Holme House, with staff instructed to monitor residential conditions closely and escalate any concerns immediately.

We continue to work with prison Governors to ensure appropriate contingency measures are in place to mitigate the impact of heating and hot water systems at a prison becoming inoperative.

Contingency plans are in place with the Ministry of Justice’s Facilities Management providers to enable them to respond to any incidents that impact upon heating, hot water, or loss of critical services to site as a priority and these plans are regularly reviewed.

We continue to work with prison Governors to ensure appropriate contingency measures are in place to mitigate the impact of heating and hot water systems at a prison becoming inoperative.

Contingency plans are in place with the Ministry of Justice’s Facilities Management providers to enable them to respond to any incidents that impact upon heating, hot water, or loss of critical services to site as a priority and these plans are regularly reviewed.

The Department recognises that systemic factors such as access to stable housing, mental‑health support and employment opportunities all play an important role in people’s ability to comply with licence conditions and avoid recall. We continue to work to improve support in these areas, for example by working to embed strong joint partnership working between prisons, probation, and across Government to improve accommodation outcomes for prison leavers.

The Government accepted the Independent Sentencing Review’s recommendations on recall in principle. Further work is underway within the Department to consider how these recommendations should be implemented in practice, including decisions on whether it is appropriate to update guidance on the use of recall. These decisions will be taken over the coming months as part of our wider work to ensure that recall is used proportionately and supports both public protection and rehabilitation.

Further work is underway to understand how best we can support practitioners in safely managing risk in the community. This will inform future options to ensure recall continues to be used proportionately, to support both public protection and rehabilitation.

We are also looking at our approach to recall across the prison estate, including how the 56-day recall period can be used more purposefully in custody, alongside gathering learning from regional initiatives to safely reduce recalls and strengthen pre-release and release-day support. This work will support our cross-government commitment to halve the proportion of offenders on probation who become homeless on their first night out of prison; and shape future options for a more consistent, end-to-end, and evidence-based approach to recall across the estate.

The criminal record regime aims to strike a balance between providing employers with the information they need to make safer recruitment decisions, while enabling ex-offenders to rebuild their lives. This is why Enhanced DBS checks are intended for roles involving a high degree of public trust or specific safeguarding responsibilities—including work with children or vulnerable adults. The roles and activities that are eligible for enhanced criminal record checks are set out in legislation.

We recognise that disclosure of a criminal record can have a significant impact on an individual’s employment opportunities and ability to reintegrate into society, and we are committed to helping those people to overcome barriers and turn away from reoffending. This includes having introduced Regional Employment Councils, which bring together prisons, probation and the Department of Work and Pensions along with businesses, to help support people with convictions out into the community.

The Deputy Prime Minister also confirmed that the Government will consider opportunities to simplify the criminal records regime to ensure it is clear and proportionate, particularly in relation to childhood offences. The Home Office and Ministry of Justice are working together to consider next steps.

The Ministry of Justice publishes data on convictions for a wide range of offences, including murder in the Outcomes by Offences data tool, that can be downloaded from the Criminal Justice Statistics landing page here: Criminal justice statistics - GOV.UK.

It is not possible to identify individual characteristics of murder victims, including their profession. This information may be held in court records but to examine individual court records would be of disproportionate costs.

The Ministry of Justice does not hold data on the number of cases that exceeded the statutory time limit of six months for summary offences. This is because we are unable to identify all cases that exceed six months that would be exempt from the statutory time limits in our caseload data.

Timeliness estimates from offence to charge for defendants dealt with in summary only cases at the magistrates’ courts are available in Table T3 of the published Criminal Courts Statistics release available at the following link:  Criminal court statistics - GOV.UK.

There has been no deletion of the Courtsdesk archive of courts lists. Courtdesk does not hold courts records. We recognise that the ability for journalists to access and search courts lists in a single place is helpful. We are doing three things to improve the way in which magistrates’ and Crown court lists are made available. First, we have launched a market engagement exercise for new providers to apply to reuse our data under a new licensing regime (which would be open to Courtsdesk to apply for). Second, we have met Courtsdesk with a view to potentially re-establishing their service, provided they can demonstrate they will comply with data protection requirements. Third, by the end of March we will be expanding the Court and Tribunal Hearings (CaTH) service, an online portal which allows journalists, professional users and the public to access and search court-related information, to include magistrates’ and Crown court lists alongside the civil, family and tribunal hearing lists already published.

Magistrates are appointed to a Local Justice Area (LJA). Newcastle-under-Lyme and Staffordshire both fall under the Staffordshire LJA, and we are unable to separate them as Magistrates are able to sit across all courts within this area. As of 01 April 2025, the number of serving magistrates in the Staffordshire Local Justice Area was 217.

The Courts and Tribunals Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on 25 February 2026. Alongside the Bill, an impact assessment of our proposed justice reforms was published: Courts and Tribunals Bill - GOV.UK. This includes an assessment of the proposed changes in the threshold for who can access a jury trial.

A response was sent on 24 February and the Department apologises for the significant delay in replying. We recognise that, on this occasion, the delay falls short of expected standards.

The Government has no role in the process for assigning judges to cases, and it has not received any representations on the composition of the bench for the judicial review of Palestine Action’s proscription.